Case 11





The Declarer leads three rounds of Trumps, on the third an adversary

refuses.



Later in the play the Declarer leads a winning card which is trumped by

the adversary who has refused Trumps.



The player who trumped the trick gathered it.



The Declarer said, "How did you win it?"



The player answered, "I trumped it."



The Dummy then said, "Who trumped it?"



After this remark by the Dummy, the Declarer claims a revoke, the claim

is disputed upon the ground that the Dummy called the revoke to the

attention of the Declarer. The Declarer states that he would have made

the claim, regardless of Dummy's remark.



Query: Should the revoke be allowed?





DECISION



Law 60 prescribes explicitly the privileges of the Dummy after he has

placed his hand on the table.



There are exactly six things which he may do and no more.



Law 61 provides, "Should the declarer's partner call attention to any

other incident of the play in consequence of which any penalty might

have been exacted, the declarer is precluded from exacting such

penalty."



Inasmuch as asking "Who won the trick?" is not one of the six

privileges allowed the Dummy, such action is irregular, and must, of

necessity, call attention to the revoke. Had the Dummy actually claimed

the revoke, it would preclude the exaction of a penalty, even had the

Declarer been about to claim it. It is, therefore, immaterial whether

the Declarer would have noticed the revoke had the Dummy not made the

irregular remark.



The question is decided in the negative.





Case 10 Case 12 facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail

Feedback